Bug 206395 - Review Request: picocom - Minimal serial communications program
Review Request: picocom - Minimal serial communications program
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review (Show other bugs)
All Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Denis Leroy
Fedora Package Reviews List
Depends On:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2006-09-14 00:15 EDT by jafo-redhat
Modified: 2007-11-30 17:11 EST (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2006-09-19 12:53:56 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description jafo-redhat 2006-09-14 00:15:05 EDT
Spec URL: ftp://ftp.tummy.com/pub/tummy/RPMS/SRPMS/picocom.spec
SRPM URL: ftp://ftp.tummy.com/pub/tummy/RPMS/SRPMS/picocom-1.4-1.src.rpm
As its name suggests, [picocom] is a minimal dumb-terminal emulation
program. It is, in principle, very much like minicom, only it's "pico"
instead of "mini"! It was designed to serve as a simple, manual, modem
configuration, testing, and debugging tool. It has also served (quite
well) as a low-tech "terminal-window" to allow operator intervention
in PPP connection scripts (something like the ms-windows "open
terminal window before / after dialing" feature).  It could also prove
useful in many other similar tasks. It is ideal for embedded systems
since its memory footprint is minimal (less than 20K, when
Comment 1 Parag AN(पराग) 2006-09-14 06:43:03 EDT
{Not Official Reviewer}
packaging looks ok.
+ Mockbuild is successfull for i386 FC6 
+ rpmlint on binary rpm is silent
- dist tag is NOT present
+ Buildroot is correct
+ source URL is correct
+ License used is GPL
+ License file LICENSE.txt is included
+ MD5 sum on tarball is matching upstream tarball
08fcc5f6bb9e7676a2569386d5ea9f70  picocom-1.4.tar.gz
+ No duplicate files

Not tested package.

You need to use macros change 
Comment 2 Denis Leroy 2006-09-14 07:25:54 EDT
Looks good!

Must fix:

- debug package is broken. Just remove the strip command from the spec and let
RPM handle it automatically.

- RPM_OPT_FLAGS and compiler string are not honored. For example, just add
'CC=%{__cc} CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" to the make command. Also add 
'%{_smp_mflags}' to make line.

- in %files section, use %{_bindir} instead of /usr/bin/

- don't include empty TODO file.

Nice to have:

- use install instead of cp, to make sure files get correct permissions
Comment 3 jafo-redhat 2006-09-14 12:35:15 EDT
Thanks for the review.  I put the strip in there because rpmlint was winging
about the binary not being stripped.  I've removed it and made all other changes.

Comment 4 Denis Leroy 2006-09-14 12:52:53 EDT
> I put the strip in there because rpmlint was winging
> about the binary not being stripped

This usually means you're missing an RPM development package. rpmdevtools,
rpmlint or rpm-libs, i forget which one.
Comment 5 jafo-redhat 2006-09-14 15:32:56 EDT
Obviously I ha rpmlint :-).  I already had rpm-libs, so it must have been
rpmdevtools.  I've got it installed now, thanks.

Comment 6 Denis Leroy 2006-09-14 15:44:11 EDT
MUST items:

- rpmlint clean
- package names ok
- spec follows guidelines
- GPL license verified and included
- tarball md5sum verified
- clean mock build
- own its directories
- permissions good
- no %files duplicates
- standard Group:
- executable is working
- good %clean section

I hereby solemny declare this package APPROVED!

Comment 7 Denis Leroy 2006-09-19 05:50:07 EDT
(don't forget to build your package and close this bug. thx)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.